Add support for Cilium CNI #1560
Conversation
kubermatic-bot
added
release-note
examples/terraform/gce/variables.tf
Outdated
| @@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ variable "control_plane_volume_size" { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| variable "control_plane_image_family" { | |||
| default = "ubuntu-1804-lts" | |||
| default = "ubuntu-2004-lts" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a breaking change because it might cause all instances to be recreated for those who don't bind the image in terraform.tfvars. If this is required, I suggest putting a warning in the release note.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Okay i put this into another PR than.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's okay to leave the change in this PR, just make sure the release note reflects the change.
|
/retitle Add support for Cilium CNI |
|
/test pull-kubeone-test |
1 similar comment
|
/test pull-kubeone-test |
| # # kubeProxyReplacement defines weather cilium relies on underlying Kernel support to replace kube-proxy functionality by eBPF (strict), | ||
| # # or disables a subset of those features so cilium does not bail out if the kernel support is missing (disabled). | ||
| # kubeProxyReplacement: "disabled" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I prefer splitting long comments to 80 or 120 characters.
| # # kubeProxyReplacement defines weather cilium relies on underlying Kernel support to replace kube-proxy functionality by eBPF (strict), | |
| # # or disables a subset of those features so cilium does not bail out if the kernel support is missing (disabled). | |
| # kubeProxyReplacement: "disabled" | |
| # # kubeProxyReplacement defines weather cilium relies on underlying Kernel support | |
| # # to replace kube-proxy functionality by eBPF (strict), or disables a subset of those | |
| # # features so cilium does not bail out if the kernel support is missing (disabled). | |
| # kubeProxyReplacement: "disabled" |
| // validated cilium kube-proxy replacement | ||
| if c.CNI.Cilium != nil && c.CNI.Cilium.KubeProxyReplacement != kubeone.KubeProxyReplacementDisabled && (c.KubeProxy == nil || !c.KubeProxy.SkipInstallation) { | ||
| allErrs = append(allErrs, field.Invalid(fldPath.Child("cni"), c.CNI.Cilium.KubeProxyReplacement, ".cilium.kubeProxyReplacement cannot be set with kube-proxy enabled")) | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| if c.KubeProxy != nil { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does it make sense to add a rule that if kube-proxy installation is skipped, you can't have .kubeProxy.iptables or .kubeProxy.ipvs defined because those settings are no-op in that case?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think its okay not to validate it, maybe a warning would be good.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's leave it as it is right now and eventually revisit it later.
|
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: ee94d1c29a3d7c61bdf492ba4910b68f0fd86c79
|
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: WeirdMachine, xmudrii The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
What this PR does / why we need it:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):Fixes #462
Special notes for your reviewer:
Support for hubble and kube-proxy free deployments
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: